5 ms·

Having worked on a product that made extensive use of them, I can confidently say that these personality tests are complete psychobabble bunk. The only thing wo

Having worked on a product that made extensive use of them, I can confidently say that these personality tests are complete psychobabble bunk. The only thing worse than thumping your chest with pride for falling into an overgeneralized and mostly arbitrary population group is being profiled and judged for falling into one. First of all, personality traits change over time. Even if it were possible to create an accurate assessment, the results would be invalid after a year. The creators of these tests like to say that they identify persistent traits that underly the changes, but these are little more than meandering PR rationalizations. Behavioral bases change gradually over time also. Life experiences have a way of doing that. Second, the human psyche is far too complex to draw any kind of reasonable conclusion from a result along 4 axes. Imagine that you're trying to find a location in the middle of a vast forest, and your map is a blank sheet except for the temperature, elevation, wind speed, and air pressure of the destination at the time it was measured.

ryan-allen 18y ago
So, that'd make you ISTJ, yeah? :P
dhimes 18y ago
more detail: http://skepdic.com/myersb.html http://skepdic.com/myersb.html
- tokenadult 18y ago
  The recommended site is good in general, links to a lot of scientific literature, and is especially strong about fallacies in psychology.
ryan-allen 18y ago
But in all seriousness, why so negative? It can only ever be considered as a guide, and if the end is understanding (i.e. reaching your destination through the forest) then who cares if the map isn't a complete map? Isn't that the point of maps? If the goal is 100% correctness of analysis down to the letter, than the instrument fails miserably. If the goal is perhaps, an increased self awareness, the possibility of understanding your other crazy peers and friends, figuring out what your strengths are and playing to them, then, isn't the instrument worthwhile? It's nothing more than a conceptual framework with the goal of measuring and typecasting for deeper understanding. This is what I like about the instrument the most: answer a bunch of questions, get some hopefully insightful profile. To outright poo-poo it is incredibly negative nancy. What about the people who became more effective at work and at home as a result of taking it? What about the couple that were able to work out their differences and be understand each other? Are you going to invalidate the instrument despite it may have some positive influence on peoples lives? You barstard! And in closing, the instrument has been verified with a scientific statistical method. I have no idea what that means, but it sounds important. Certainly more thorough than tickle.com.
- river_styx 18y ago
  The reason I poo-poo it is that I see many people using these results as nearly the final word on how to judge someone, rather than just a guide. Which is dangerous, in my opinion. The map isn't dangerous in and of itself, but it becomes dangerous when the mapmaker gives the impression that it gives more detail than it actually does. edit: Additionally, there's a large psychological bias on the first information you receive about a person. If you see these results before meeting the subject, you will be likely to frame him according to the results, whether they fit him or not.
  - jwilliams 18y ago
    > The map isn't dangerous in and of itself, but it becomes dangerous when the mapmaker gives the impression that it gives more detail than it actually does. I agree. I've seen this misused quite a lot. Psychometric testing is interesting, and can reveal tendencies - but that's about it. Certainly using this as "hard data" for things like hiring, corporate restructures, etc, is fraught with issues. In reality, the best predictor of a person's behaviour is (a lot of) detail on past performance. Even then, there are flaws.
  - jey 18y ago
    Then the problem is with the people misusing the results, not with the test itself. The MBTI doesn't claim to be a perfect predictor at all; instead it's supposed to measure tendencies.
  - ryan-allen 18y ago
    People are judging each other left, right and centre on much more biased criteria every day whether you like it or not. Don't have an instrument to judge someone with? They'll judge you based on their preconceptions, their life experience, and a number of other factors that are quite likely more unsound than an external instrument. People are going to judge you anyway, buddy. Just hope the guy calling the shots isn't an arsehole and has your best interests in mind. Which leads me to believe that your problem isn't with the MBTI itself but the human tendency to judge one another on any basis of criteria. That's life. Those looking to apply MBTI for any particular reason to any particular person (including themselves) isn't any worse or wrong or ill-meaning than the next fellow. It just depends on whether they're an arsehole or not. Please, don't confuse the two.
Alex3917 18y ago
There is no question that the MBTI as a whole does not hold up to scientific testing, but individual pieces of it do work. For example, the (E/I) portion of the type indicator is supported by empirical psych studies. Also, just about everyone on Hacker News is an NT, which surely must mean something. (Regardless of what the site you submitted says.)
- trickjarrett 18y ago
  Woooo for being in the minority. I'm a rare ENFJ in the developer community.
tokipin 18y ago
i think part of the problem is that people simply aren't knowledgeable about the theory. what Jung described is not at all as trivial as the Myers-Briggs implementation makes it seem. this combined with the natural difficulty of figuring out anything about people through their own volition makes it a messy issue

ryan-allen 18y ago

So, that'd make you ISTJ, yeah? :P

dhimes 18y ago

more detail: http://skepdic.com/myersb.html http://skepdic.com/myersb.html

tokenadult 18y ago
The recommended site is good in general, links to a lot of scientific literature, and is especially strong about fallacies in psychology.

ryan-allen 18y ago

But in all seriousness, why so negative? It can only ever be considered as a guide, and if the end is understanding (i.e. reaching your destination through the forest) then who cares if the map isn't a complete map? Isn't that the point of maps? If the goal is 100% correctness of analysis down to the letter, than the instrument fails miserably. If the goal is perhaps, an increased self awareness, the possibility of understanding your other crazy peers and friends, figuring out what your strengths are and playing to them, then, isn't the instrument worthwhile? It's nothing more than a conceptual framework with the goal of measuring and typecasting for deeper understanding. This is what I like about the instrument the most: answer a bunch of questions, get some hopefully insightful profile. To outright poo-poo it is incredibly negative nancy. What about the people who became more effective at work and at home as a result of taking it? What about the couple that were able to work out their differences and be understand each other? Are you going to invalidate the instrument despite it may have some positive influence on peoples lives? You barstard! And in closing, the instrument has been verified with a scientific statistical method. I have no idea what that means, but it sounds important. Certainly more thorough than tickle.com.

river_styx 18y ago
The reason I poo-poo it is that I see many people using these results as nearly the final word on how to judge someone, rather than just a guide. Which is dangerous, in my opinion. The map isn't dangerous in and of itself, but it becomes dangerous when the mapmaker gives the impression that it gives more detail than it actually does. edit: Additionally, there's a large psychological bias on the first information you receive about a person. If you see these results before meeting the subject, you will be likely to frame him according to the results, whether they fit him or not.
- jwilliams 18y ago
  > The map isn't dangerous in and of itself, but it becomes dangerous when the mapmaker gives the impression that it gives more detail than it actually does. I agree. I've seen this misused quite a lot. Psychometric testing is interesting, and can reveal tendencies - but that's about it. Certainly using this as "hard data" for things like hiring, corporate restructures, etc, is fraught with issues. In reality, the best predictor of a person's behaviour is (a lot of) detail on past performance. Even then, there are flaws.
- jey 18y ago
  Then the problem is with the people misusing the results, not with the test itself. The MBTI doesn't claim to be a perfect predictor at all; instead it's supposed to measure tendencies.
- ryan-allen 18y ago
  People are judging each other left, right and centre on much more biased criteria every day whether you like it or not. Don't have an instrument to judge someone with? They'll judge you based on their preconceptions, their life experience, and a number of other factors that are quite likely more unsound than an external instrument. People are going to judge you anyway, buddy. Just hope the guy calling the shots isn't an arsehole and has your best interests in mind. Which leads me to believe that your problem isn't with the MBTI itself but the human tendency to judge one another on any basis of criteria. That's life. Those looking to apply MBTI for any particular reason to any particular person (including themselves) isn't any worse or wrong or ill-meaning than the next fellow. It just depends on whether they're an arsehole or not. Please, don't confuse the two.

Alex3917 18y ago

There is no question that the MBTI as a whole does not hold up to scientific testing, but individual pieces of it do work. For example, the (E/I) portion of the type indicator is supported by empirical psych studies. Also, just about everyone on Hacker News is an NT, which surely must mean something. (Regardless of what the site you submitted says.)

trickjarrett 18y ago
Woooo for being in the minority. I'm a rare ENFJ in the developer community.

tokipin 18y ago

i think part of the problem is that people simply aren't knowledgeable about the theory. what Jung described is not at all as trivial as the Myers-Briggs implementation makes it seem. this combined with the natural difficulty of figuring out anything about people through their own volition makes it a messy issue